Under the CSO https://www.cambridgema.gov/streets...ancesandplans/cyclingsafetyordinance/ProjectsAre there any plans for Kirkland St. to get protected bike lanes? It's a critical link between Union Sq and Harvard that gets heavy bike traffic already despite being quite dangerous, and feeds directly into Somerville's excellent bike lanes on Washington St. Crossing the city line into Cambridge right now is jarring.
Somerville has only had a bike plan for maybe 2 years now? Cambridge's came out in 2015. Kirkland St is identified as a transit corridor, with biking routes using other, lower volume streets. You're right that it's a clear shot between Harvard and Union, but that's also what makes it critical for transit.Under the CSO https://www.cambridgema.gov/streets...ancesandplans/cyclingsafetyordinance/Projects
It is not slated to get bike lanes other than a short stretch in front of Memorial hall. It is a little awkward since the Somerville version of it (Washington St) did receive bike lanes. It seemed Cambridge's bicycle plan was not planned in coordination with Somerville's. If you look at the map I linked it does not really prioritize any crosstown connections.
Yeah I mean you’re right but the 109 goes right up Washington through Kirkland and the street width doesn’t meaningfully change as you go across the border. And Washington street has bike lanes.Somerville has only had a bike plan for maybe 2 years now? Cambridge's came out in 2015. Kirkland St is identified as a transit corridor, with biking routes using other, lower volume streets. You're right that it's a clear shot between Harvard and Union, but that's also what makes it critical for transit.
Once cambridge has all of its CSO connected network complete, we need to encourage the city to remove (free) resident parking from one side of neighborhood streets (and just having it on one side instead of both). That space could be freed up for a contraflow bike lane, protected bike lane, secure bike parking, widened sidewalks, child play space, etc. Kirkland st would benefit greatly from this, as well as key neighborhood streets (Inman st, Pearl St, Charles St, Linnean St, etc). This would open up more direct routes for cycling (and encourage folks who are only comfortable cycling in a protected lane, even on neighboorhood streets, like riding with your toddlers to school/sports). Similar to dutch neighborhoods, which use street space for a mix of street parking, plants, playgrounds, trash bins, and bike parking, instead of just two full lanes of free parking.Yeah I mean you’re right but the 109 goes right up Washington through Kirkland and the street width doesn’t meaningfully change as you go across the border. And Washington street has bike lanes.
In an astonishing twist... this is already repaved. The approaches to the bridge were completed overnight Sunday into Monday, the bridge deck itself last night.Bike lanes on W. 4th St. Bridge temporarily removed: https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...ane-on-w-4th-street-bridge-for-paving-project
So Cambridge is definitely planning some kind of reconstruction for Kirkland, but unclear if that will included protected bike lanes.Are there any plans for Kirkland St. to get protected bike lanes? It's a critical link between Union Sq and Harvard that gets heavy bike traffic already despite being quite dangerous, and feeds directly into Somerville's excellent bike lanes on Washington St. Crossing the city line into Cambridge right now is jarring.
So Cambridge is definitely planning some kind of reconstruction for Kirkland, but unclear if that will included protected bike lanes.
Cambridge's 2015 bike plan was updated in 2020, and the documents on that process talk about some of the segments that weren't added to the network plan despite tons of public comments asking for them. Kirkland is among those streets, see page 254 of this doc, which outlines their rationale. TL;DR it states they want to put bus queue jumps approaching the Beacon intersection and that means no room for quick build bike lanes in that section. And they propose an alternate route for cyclists using Scott/Beacon, which I'm fairly certain no one will use...
I will not give credit where it's not due because I am someone who has been almost run over by a wacko bus driver on the new Washington Street - the bus jump lane replaces a key section of protected bike lanes going into Union Square.Thanks for the link and overview. The city's rationale is incredibly thin here.. Somerville took literally the same street and implemented everything Cambridge claims to want (bus queue jumps, improved transit facilities) PLUS protected bike lanes. Whether or not Cambridge wants it to be, Kirkland St. is a key bike corridor and needs to be treated as such. Ideally before someone gets killed.
Updates:Cambridge has been busy with their bike lanes this summer:
- Broadway (Portland to Columbia) was largely installed in July. Looks like just posts and symbols remain: https://bsky.app/profile/cyclejargon.bsky.social/post/3lt3isbd3mk2b
- Main St (Portland to Sidney Ext) was also largely installed in July and same: just posts and symbols remain: https://bsky.app/profile/ojc.bsky.social/post/3lvvajkjoq22p
- Waverly St: (Brookline St to Henry St): was largely installed in July and same: just posts and symbols remain.
- Vassar St (Memorial Dr to Amesbury St): looks like the existing markings have been ground out and layout of the new lines is visible.
- Aberdeen Ave: Street was repaved over the last few weeks and the layout lines for separated bike lanes along the median are visible.
- River St: It's moving along, but not a paint and post project, so it's slow.
- Mass Ave (Harvard to Porter): the median on Mass Ave has been removed to enable utility work that's a precursor to the separated bike lanes.
The challenge is high performance e-bikes definitely blur the lines between e-bikes and mopeds. When you have top speeds in the 30-40 mph range, you should have crossed classifications (but often don't).I wouldn’t mind some stricter enforcement of rules on mopeds, but conflating mopeds and bikes is disingenuous.
The challenge is high performance e-bikes definitely blur the lines between e-bikes and mopeds. When you have top speeds in the 30-40 mph range, you should have crossed classifications (but often don't).
on the flip side, i have a class 3 ebike. i love being able to whip around an open road at 30mph. but when i commute to work on a shared use path, i set it at class 2 level and tend to ride at the 15-20 range. there’s absolutely no reason to ban that on shared use paths, and doing so would be harmful.One issue is how easy it is to manipulate these. I bought a class-2 (Under MA/common USA definitions, not as @bigeman312 described. AKA - up to 20mph) recently and discovered that I could lift the pedal assist speed governor just by clicking a button in the associated app. I...shouldn't be able to do that? Like, this is low hanging fruit. I can only up it to 25mph, but I shouldn't be able to do that if my location is in MA or another state that doesn't qualify that as an ebike anymore.
The classes you described above would essentially make cargo bikes illegal in the state. I don't disagree that there's more regulation required but it needs to be thought through much more than the above, which are not at all aligned with international best practice. 100 lbs is a blatantly arbitrary threshold. The power of the bike is what matter, and to a lesser degree things like width. You can and do have a >100lbs pound bike limited to 20mph that's built to shuttle around kids, why should that be regulated like a motorcycle?
on the flip side, i have a class 3 ebike. i love being able to whip around an open road at 30mph. but when i commute to work on a shared use path, i set it at class 2 level and tend to ride at the 15-20 range. there’s absolutely no reason to ban that on shared use paths, and doing so would be harmful.
operating at a class 2 level should absolutely positively not be treated like a motorcycle w/licensing and insurance. and there should never ever be a prohibition against riding any bike on a sidewalk unless a fully protected bike lane exists next to it